Have we reached the tipping point for planet earth?

Have world leaders hit their crucial target of significantly reducing the rate of biodiversity loss by today?

That was the objective international governments set themselves in 2002. Ahead of the next meeting in Japan later this year, a new United Nations report reveals whether leaders have succeeded, or failed, to tackle the growing threat to the planet’s fragile ecosystem by 2010.

The third edition of the Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO-3), produced by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) explores not only what has been achieved so far – if anything – but also forecasts new consequences for people and communities across the world if more isn’t done.

In fact, with 2010 designated the International Year of Biodiversity by the UN, there is a direct call from the Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in the report’s foreword to make tackling the root causes of biodiversity loss a “higher priority in all areas of decision making” in all economic sectors.

The GBO-3 report reveals:

The extent of biodiversity loss since 2002

How close we are to ‘the tipping point’

If the ongoing reduction in our planet’s fragile biodiversity avoidable even at the 11th hour

And what key issues the world leaders will need to urgently address in Japan

One man who can give unique insights into these and other pressing questions is Professor Thomas E. Lovejoy. Former Chief Biodiversity Advisor to the World Bank. Prof. Lovejoy has also advised the presidential administrations of Reagan, Bush and Clinton and led the production of the GBO-3 report.

You can pre-submit questions or log on live to the studio where broadcaster Ian Collins will put those questions from around the world directly to Prof Lovejoy.

For more information visitwww.cbd.int.The GBO-3 report will be available online as of 10 May 2020 at 10:30 BST.

United Nations Webchat

H: Jayne Constantinis, host

A: Professor E. Lovejoy

H: Hello. This is the United Nations third, global biodiversity report and what it says about the future for our planet makes shocking reading. In today’s show, we find out why

Titles

H: Hello and welcome to “Make a Difference, I’m Jayne Constantinis. Now coming up on the programme today – we have the full findings of the third global biodiversity report. The World Bank’s former chief biodiversity advisor gives us his reaction. And all your questions about the issues this report raises will be answered live. Now, 8 years ago world leaders gave themselves until 2010 to tackle the growing threat to the planet’s fragile ecosystem. Later this year they’ll gather again to discuss how they’ve progressed. The report released today is not good news. To talk us through the main findings of the report from the convention on biological diversity I’m joined by Professor E. Lovejoy - Professor Lovejoy welcome, Tom if I may

A: Thank you

H: Now Professor Lovejoy is former biodiversity advisor to the World Bank and three US presidential administrations. Tom, let’s begin by just, for a second if we may, assessing how bad the situation is? You’ve been involved in compiling the report

A: I mean it just is not a pretty picture. Despite some good and important efforts that have been made, so none of the targets set for 2010 have been met and looking ahead which is what this report is mostly about, there are all kinds of new sort of levels of danger at biodiversity which there are tipping points such as a portion of the Amazon dying back and turning into Savannah or coral reefs basically just beginning to disappear from the world’s oceans. Having said that there still is plenty that can be done to avoid much of the peril

H: And is there a simple answer to the question why haven’t the targets been met?

A: well you know I think to start with they were ambitious targets, it takes a while for societies to mobilise but I would say there are two sorts of fundamental things. One is the biology of the planet simply hasn’t risen to the level in human affairs that it deserves and the second is we just aren’t involved in enough integrated planning as to how we use our lands and resources

H: Don’t forget we are live today so if you’ve got a question for Professor Lovejoy then type it in the box on your screen and send it to us, with your name of course, we’ll get through as many as we can during the course of the programme. We do want to hear from you. Before we take any questions though I want to show you the first of three short films looking at the report and its findings

Video Footage

To mark the international year of biodiversity, this week’s sees the United Nations release global biodiversity Outlook 3 – the most comprehensive report yet compiled on the state of life on our planet.

Ahmed Djoghlaf, executive secretary, Convention on Biological Diversity - “This report is quite unique because it’s not only based on literature but it’s also based on the 110 natoinal reports that we have received so far by government, just indicating the status of biodiversity at local, national and global level”

However, the report makes for grim reading. It reveals how the earth’s ecosystems and species are buckling under the strain of unsustainable development. Based on data supplied both by the scientific community as well as directly from national governments the report reveals that the target agreed by world governments at the 2002 world summit on sustainable development to achieve by 2010 “a significant reduction in the current rate of biodiversity loss” has not been met. Indeed not a single government submitting national reports claim that their 2010 biodiversity target has been completely met at the national level. In synthesising this evidence the report states that “the consequences of current trends are much worse than previously thought”, highlighting the impact on the poor in particular who “stand to suffer disproportionately from potentially catastrophic changes to ecosystems in coming decades.”Although ultimately all societies stand to lose

Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary General, United Nations: “Our lives depend on biological diversity. Species and ecosystems are disappearing at an unsustainable rate. We humans are the cause”

Achim Steiner, Executive Director, UN Environment Programme: “Without biodiversity there would be no life on planet earth, and biodiversity is dependent on species. Without species we cannot have the ecosystems that we have become accustomed to, and also the services and the goods that derive from ecosystems “

H: Tom, Achim Steiner in that film there was talking about the complex inter-relationships between species – how fragile are those relationships?

A: They’re very often extremely fragile and extremely precise relationships, and a really great example is that between a coral animal and an alga. That partnership is at the basis of the entire coral reef ecosystem and if the water is warmed for too long a period of time, the animal just ejects the alga and the entire ecosystem collapses, and that effects probably about 5% of the world’s population, which live within 100m of coral reefs

H: I mean you’ve described it as earth’s life support system?

A: Well it is a life support system and the planet actually works as a biophysical system, it’s not just a physical system, it’s a biological system which is linked to it, and we being very biological are just very much benefited from that, and depend on that

H: I mean you talked before, about you know, why the target’s haven’t been met and about a changing attitude. Do you think it’s because this is not – the fragility of it and the sort of inter-relationships are not fully understood?

A: Well certainly the fragility and the vulnerability and the importance of it is not understood. What further is not understood is the issue of scale and what is an acceptable human activity at a small scale, becomes unacceptable when it is on a big scale? And so sort of suddenly waking up to the fact that we could be having this huge impact on other living things is really an important part of getting to the solution

H: I want to take a question from Fiona in Edinburgh because I think she speaks with a voice that many other people will recognise. “I read the media coverage this morning about the report, I’m shocked to have to admit and afraid. The story suggests quite strongly that it really is too late and we’ll lose some wonderful species of animal like the snow leopard. Is it really true or perhaps some hysteria from the media?” I think many of us are looking for reassurance that it’s not too late

A: Well it certainly is not too late for most things. Probably too late for some things which have tiny populations now or some particularly vulnerable ecosystems which are down to their last little remnants, are still pressured. But the important thing to understand here is there is not a single tipping point in the way we are affecting biological diversity, it’s a whole series of tipping points and so the real point is let’s tip as few of those as we can

H: Ok plenty more of your questions coming up shortly, but I just want to show you the second of our short films, and this one is looking at the impact that the lack of action that Tom is talking about has had on various different of these very, very fragile ecosystems

Video Footage

Most endangered of all oceans’ ecosystems are the warm water reef-building corals. Faced by the double whammy of rising sea temperatures and ocean acidification, they are undergoing the most rapid deterioration. The proportion of reefs with at least 50% living coral cover declined from nearly 66% in the early 1980s to just 4% in 2004, indicating a long term shift to a less productive system. Over-exploitation and destructive fishing practices are at the heart of the threats being imposed on the world’s ocean food webs. About 80% of the world fish stocks, for which assessment information is available, are fully exploited or over-exploited. Over-exploitation brings ever closer the threat of suddenly reaching a tipping point, a place of no return where habitat degradation and species loss is irreparable. Land based species and ecosystems fare little better in the report. It finds one quarter of the world’s land is becoming degraded. It shows that although de-forestation has recently slowed in some countries, most notably the Amazon, forests continue to be lost at a rapid rate, approximately 130,000km per year. Forests are estimated to contain more than half the world’s terrestrial animal and plant species, says the report, but there has been some progress too.

Prof. Tom Lovejoy: “Well you know the little known secret is that the Amazon has gone from almost no protection to 57% protected, and while that’s not enough, it shows we can actually make a big difference and the real issue now is to bring it all to scale and to really work it into the economics of the world.”

Of 292 large rivers systems, 2/3 have become moderately or highly fragmented by dams and reservoirs. Water quality shows variable trends with improvements in some regions being offset by serious pollution in many densely populated areas. One group of species, tropical freshwater fish, have declined by 74%. The population of wild vertebrates species fell by an average of 31% globally between 1970 and 2006 with a decline especially severe in the tropics, and in freshwater ecosystems, and of domesticated animals at least one fifth of livestock breeds are at risk of extinction, and the true figure may be much higher. Although important progress is being made to conserve plant genetic diversity, especially through using seed banks - overall genetic diversity is being lost in both natural ecosystems and in systems of crop and livestock production.

The release of the Global Biodiversity Outlook three report during the international year of biodiversity is a wake-up call to the world that we are destroying the natural capital on which our livelihoods depend.

Pavan Sukhoev, Study Leader, TCCU: “My problem with capitalism as we implement it today is that we make it one dimensional and that’s not going to work. The world is a three dimensional space right? You are dependent on society and community for well-being. You are dependent on nature for well-being and you like your house and your railroad and your car, but you can’t just only live with the house, railroad and car but with no clean air, no fresh water, no friends, no family and yet our entire economic thinking is geared towards just maintaining production of goods and services and maintaining one dimension of capitalism. Can’t be right

H: We hear a lot in the media and ordinary people talking about climate change, less about biodiversity. Why do you think it seems to play second fiddle as it were in public perception?

A: I think the problem is the – the debate has been shaped by physical science, and it ignores the biology of the planet and that in fact the biology of the planet is more sensitive to climate change than almost anything else on the human agenda and you know the powers that be were discussing a target of 2 degrees in Copenhagen – I can tell you flatly that 2 degrees is too much for the world’s ecosystems. 2 degrees you’ll have no coral reefs, 2 degrees you will have die back in a big chunk of the Amazon. So climate change now comes on top of all the other things we’re doing to biological diversity, and that’s part of the reason this outlook is so disturbing

H: Let’s take a question from Dan Faith, doesn’t say where he’s from, “surprisingly GBO3 does not mention the vast number of species still unknown to science. Shouldn’t a useful biodiversity outlook assess this and suggest ways to overcome this critical knowledge gap?” What’s your response to that?

A: Well it’s a good point but the larger point is that this is actually the international year of biodiversity, and in that set of activities are beyond looking at the state of biodiversity going forward. There is definite emphasis being put on the need to further explore life on earth which would be a grand adventure, I mean David Attenborough could start all over, right?

H: I think he’s a bit old for that

A: Oh I don’t know

H: Oh he’s going to live forever!

A: He –

H: We hope

A: He’s just been filming tracks of pterasaurs in France

H: Wow, amazing person. We understand that we’ve got quite a large audience from Bath university, so let’s take what I suspect is a collective question but it’s from Jack who says “do you think people will be inspired enough to make the drastic changes needed to avoid significant climate changes without at least some disaster impacting their lives? For the average city dweller the idea of climate change is a distant problem with their day-to-day lives utterly unaffected, save for media coverage. Do you think it’s possible for the message to be taken seriously enough or do you think change won’t be made until people’s way of life is more directly at risk, i.e. through sea level rise or water and food shortages?” So Jack from Bath

A: so I dearly hope that it won’t take those kinds of disasters to illicit the kind of response from public and governments that we need, just because by the time you have some of those going a whole bunch of other things are happening that are negative too. And so I think the flip side of all of that and the UK is so good about this kind of thing, is people actually getting inspired by the wonders of nature. Just individual animals and plants can transform how people look at the whole issue of conservation and the biological base of life on earth

H: But there are – the point that Jack’s making is valid isn’t it, in that – and it’s – I think the other side of that is it’s a sad reflection on human nature that unless it’s bothering me, you know the not in my back yard - to be thinking about the Amazon, to be doing something that effects your daily life to save the rainforest – how do you sell that to people?

A: Well it’s true I mean we’re hard wired to respond to immediate problems, that’s how we evolved, whether it was you know the sabre tooth tiger over the shoulder or whatever, but we’re also capable of rising above that and thinking in much bigger terms, and I’m lived and been in the game long enough to know there was a time when tropical forests were not considered an important issue. But by a good 20 /25 years ago they actually had, and even a poll of disadvantaged children in inner cities in the United States ranked tropical rainforests as one of the top ten things they worried about

H: And I suppose you’ve hit the nail on the head there – children. Every new generation is becoming more and more aware aren’t they of these issues facing the planet?

A: Well that’s certainly true, that’s certainly true and they have the optimism to think they can do something about it

H: Good. And so will we.

A: Absolutely

H: In about ten minutes when you’ve told us what the good news is! Let’s take a question from Miko, forgive me if I’m not pronouncing this correctly, - Tattalovich whose from stidev.net – cidev. He says “how can biodiversity protection benefit the poor in the developing countries?”

A: Well it’s a really good question, to think about how the poor relate to biodiversity and actually biodiversity is more important to the poor in terms of their daily lives than it is to an average individual in the developed world, and literally some calculations have been made that 57% of their annual income is derived from biodiversity directly

H: Because there is often, isn’t there the tension between outsiders’ desire to protect the environment, let’s use that term, and the needs of the people who live on the spot as it were

A: So the critical thing there is to engage the local people in the activity and also to create opportunities for them to participate in the larger adventures of the world, like a new school I recently visited in the Amazon which is way up the Rio Negro, but the little school room has broadband connection to the world

H: Wow. Fantastic. More on that in a moment but first of all let’s have a look at the third of our short films and this one is talking about the recommendations that are going to be put forward at the meeting in Japan later in the year

Video Footage

The threat to our planet’s biodiversity lies in five key driving forces, claims the report. Terrestrial habitats are not only being lost, they’ve also become highly fragmented threatening species and the ability of ecosystems to deliver important services to human communities. Excessive nitrogen and other forms of pollution are poisoning the environment. Invasive species are wiping out native plants and animals. Over exploitation on both land and sea are leading to species loss. The report also identifies that climate change is already impacting on biodiversity and is projected to become a progressively more significant threat to biodiversity in the coming decades. However the report emphasises that although the outlook is bleak, it’s not too late to do something about it

Paul Leadley, Lead Author, Global Biodiversity Outlook 3: Mathematical bottles and our observations and our experiments show that we’re not necessarily doomed, but it does show that if we don’t do something now, we will be in big trouble”

The report demonstrates that actions taken now can make a difference for the future, both the species and for ecosystems. Indeed maintaining biological diversity can help reduce the impact of threats from pests and even changing climates

Emile Frison, Director General Biodiversity International: “The insurance factor, that diversity brings, this is what farmers have been using traditionally, growing different crops, and different varieties of the crops so that if you have a very hot day or a flood on a particular moment in the year, you don’t lose everything. You don’t put all your eggs in the same basket, so diversity is becoming even more important now than it has ever been in the past”

The report concludes that actions taken over the next two decades will determine whether the relatively stable and benign environmental conditions on which human civilisation has depended for the last 10,000 years will continue beyond this century. If we fail to use this opportunity many ecosystems on the planet, and our place within them will move into unknown territory. Only by establishing and committing to new global targets with biodiversity that are SMART – Strategic, Measurable, Ambitious, Realistic and Timebound will we, the world, have a road map for the next crucial decades

Ahmed Djoghlaf: “This unique document will be submitted to the New York Biodiversity summit as well as to the Nagoya Biodiversity summit so as to allow the leaders of the world to contribute in shaping the 2050 vision on Biodiversity at the 2020 mission on Biodiversity with the full and active engagement of all stakeholder for the benefit of the children and of the world”

H: So some dire warnings but also optimism in that final bit of film there. Now we’ve got a very good question in from Mike Madden whose from St Pete’s Beach, Florida. Really putting you on the spot, you don’t know him do you? He says “ok you’re - you are in charge of the world in a new global environmental president kind of job. What are the first three things you’re going to do?”

A: Well the first thing I’d do is establish integrated planning and management – too much of what we do really consists of adding up everything we’ve done at the end of the year and calling that management and it isn’t. So it’s all about how we use the land for agriculture, how we use the land for natural ecosystems and conservation, how we use it for bio fuels, how we manage the oceans in similar kinds of ways, so integrated planning is key. Second really important thing would be to make sure that every child understands the glory of the living planet, and its deep fascination, and the third thing I would do is actually try and change our economic system so all these environmental externalities will get folded into the way we make economic decisions and thereby avoid a lot of the worst kinds of consequences

H: Because you pointed out that a huge amount of money was raised, as it were, in an instant say of the global economy – why hasn’t the same been done for biodiversity?

A: That’s right, and I mean a small fraction of that would do what we need to secure the future of the biology of the planet

H: Let’s take a question from Xavier who says “if world leaders couldn’t’ agree a deal on climate change in Copenhagen, how realistic is it that they’ll put aside political and commercial interests before Nagoya and actually do something positive and constructive?”

A: Well it’s never simple. But the really interesting thing about Copenhagen is the one piece that came together and is ready to go and there’s finally an agreement on is what to do about the world’s forests. So the biology piece finally caught up and was actually ready to go

H: What is it that is going to put pressure on these world leaders? Is it economics or is it going to be pressure from the population?

A: I think in the end public opinion is what’s going to drive most of it. It’s really hard for a national leader to get too far out in front of public opinion

H: So let’s address a question here from Emily Adams who says “what’s the appropriate balance between top down government driven conservation initiatives and bottom up locally driven conservation initiatives – do they both have a role in achieving the reduction in the rate of biodiversity loss?” Is this coming back to your word integration?

A: Well it’s – in this case it’s sort of a vertical integration and in the end whatever is achieved globally is made up of local impacts and decisions and actions. But unless they’re coordinated and sort of designed in an optimum way, you don’t get the best solution, so you really need to be doing both in a way that’s interlinked

H: A moment ago you talked about how important public opinion’s going to be at putting pressure on governments. Let’s look at that then from a different perspective because Larry Stevenson from Connecticut sent us a question – first of all he says “great idea doing this. Can you tell us how us regular Joes can do something to stop the biodiversity loss? I guess it’s up to us to take action, just say what we’ve got to do.” How do we put pressure on governments?

A: Ok this is for the regular Joes and Janes

H: Yes like myself, thank you

A: It’s all about what you do as an individual, it’s what you learn as an individual, what you communicate as an individual, what you say to your elected officials as an individual – there’s just a huge role here for everyday people

H: So is it then being vocal about the importance of this issue to our local MPs, blah blah blah, or is it about more practical actions?

A: It’s both, it’s being, being – making your voice heard with your local officials, but it’s also everybody’s own lifestyle – and there’s an awful lot in our daily lifestyles which are pretty wasteful and in the end it’s not paritcul.ary related to what we call a quality of life if we stopped and think about it, so it’s all about the amount of energy we use, how we use it, what kind of energy we use – you know what’s done in terms of local nature protection, because basically in the end we need to move from an idea of nature is just little protected areas sort of set in a sea of human activity, to virtually the opposite in which our aspirations are pursued in a natural matrix

H: So is this the new vision that you have in mind?

A: It is a new vision, it’s a – it’s a – doing ecosystem restoration at the scale of the planet, pulling CO2 out of the atmosphere in the process of doing it, strengthening the ecosystems and the biodiversity that we have

H: Ok. And let me end please with a question that hasn’t got a name attached to it but actually I suspect that it’s – it resonates with a lot of people watching. “Be honest – do you hold out any hope for the future of our planet? Is it too late to save it?”

A: It is not too late to save it. There will be a planet I have to say after we’re gone, but the real point of that question is you know is all of this loss inevitable? It is not inevitable, it’s a matter of our deciding what kind of a future we want for ourselves or our children, and therefore for our planet

H: So it’s in our hands?

A: It’s in our hands squarely

H: Excellent. Thank you very much indeed

A: Great

H: Really interesting and good to end on an optimistic note. Sadly we’ve run out of time but there’s obviously plenty more to discuss so please join us for another web TV show from New York in September. My thanks to Professor Lovejoy for joining us, and if you want to read the report in full or see those videos a gain you can visit www.cbd.int - thank you very much for watching. Bye bye for now